Skip over navigation

Journal Issue: Excellence in the Classroom Volume 17 Number 1 Spring 2007

Teacher Labor Markets in Developed Countries
Authors: Helen F. Ladd

Endnotes

  1. See OECD, Teachers Matter: Attracting, Developing and Retaining Effective Teachers (Paris, 2005), and the background reports for individual countries on which the report was based. This OECD project represents the most comprehensive analysis to date of teacher policies at an international level. OECD member countries are listed in table 1.
  2. A similar averaging problem arises for other countries, such as Australia, that also have relatively decentralized education systems.
  3. OECD, Education at a Glance: OECD Indicators 2005 (Paris, 2005), table D3.1, p. 370. All figures are converted to U.S. dollars using purchasing power parity.
  4. One exception is a comparison of the salaries of secondary school teachers with other public sector employees across a number of OECD countries in 1999. That analysis shows that with a few exceptions, teacher salaries are the same as or higher than those for computer operators, librarians, and social workers. In contrast, secondary school teachers receive lower salaries than university lecturers and civil engineers in most countries, except in Australia, Germany, and Luxembourg, where they are comparable. See OECD, Teachers Matter (see note 1), table 3.2., p. 76.
  5. OECD, Education at a Glance (see note 3), chart D3.1, p. 370. Information is missing for England, Mexico, Sweden, and Switzerland at the high school level; and for England, Sweden, and Switzerland at the primary level.
  6. OECD, Teachers Matter (see note 1), table 3.1, p. 48.
  7. Peter Dolton, “The Economics of UK Teacher Supply: The Graduate’s Decision,” Economic Journal 100 (1990): 91–104.
  8. Arnaud Chevalier, Peter Dolton, and Steven McIntosh, “Recruiting and Retaining Teachers in the U.K.: An Analysis of Graduate Occupation Choice from the 1960s to the 1990s,” Economica (forthcoming).
  9. S. Wolter and S. Denzler, “Wage Elasticity of the Teacher Supply in Switzerland,” Discussion Paper 733 (Bonn: Institute for the Study of Labor, 2003), as cited in OECD, Teachers Matter (see note 1), p. 70.
  10. Chevalier, Dolton, and McIntosh, “Recruiting and Retaining Teachers in the U.K.” (see note 8), p. 28.
  11. For data on vacancy rates in London, see Alistair Ross and Merryn Hutchings, Attracting, Developing and Retaining Effective Teachers in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland: OECD Background Report (Paris, March 2003), para. 157, p. 33.
  12. The following discussion is based on OECD, Teachers Matter (see note 1), pp. 146 and 147.
  13. Andrew Leigh, Teacher Pay and Teacher Aptitude, Australian National University, Manuscript, November 2005.
  14. OECD, Teachers Matter (see note 1), p. 60.
  15. Ibid., p. 60.
  16. Ibid., p. 52.
  17. Ibid., p. 53.
  18. Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training, and Youth Affairs (MCEETYA), Demand and Supply of Primary and Secondary Teachers in Australia (Melbourne, Victoria, 2004).
  19. OECD, Education at a Glance (see note 3), table D3.1, p. 369.
  20. OECD, Teachers Matter (see note 1), figure 6.4, p. 181.
  21. Ibid., table 6.3, p. 175.
  22. Ibid., p. 202.
  23. Peter J. Dolton, “Teacher Supply,” in Handbook of the Economics of Education, edited by E. A. Hanushek and F. Welch (forthcoming).
  24. Peter Dolton, A. Tremayne, and T. Chung. “The Economic Cycle and Teacher Supply,” paper commissioned for the OECD Activity, “Attracting, Developing and Retaining Effective Teachers” (Paris: OECD Directorate for Education, 2003), available from www.oecd.org/edu.teacherpolicy; cited in OECD, Teachers Matter (see note 1), p. 180.
  25. Ross and Hutchings, Attracting, Developing and Retaining Effective Teachers (see note 11), para. 343, p. 66.
  26. OECD, Teachers Matter (see note 1), p. 195.
  27. Ibid., p. 196.
  28. Ibid., p. 194.
  29. Ibid., p. 173.
  30. OECD, Teachers Matter (see note 1), table 6.1A.
  31. Alan Smithers and Pamela Robinson, Teachers Leaving (Buckingham, U.K.: Centre for Education and Employment Research, 2003), table 7.1, p. 49. Data are based on responses of teachers leaving schools for destinations other than teaching in another publicly supported school. The sample of 1,051 teachers excludes those leaving because they have reached normal retirement age or because of maternity.
  32. Ibid., p. 63.
  33. Anders Bjorklund and others, The Market Comes to Sweden (New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 2006), table 5.1, p. 63, and related discussion.
  34. See OECD, Teachers Matter (see note 1), p. 176, for references to the relevant studies.
  35. Ibid., chap. 6.
  36. International Outcomes of Learning in Mathematics Literacy and Problem Solving: PISA 2003 from the U.S. Perspective (http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/pisa/PISA2003HighlightsFigures.asp?figure=9&quest=1). In addition, the United States scored below three non-OECD participating countries or areas—Hong Kong- China, Lichtenstein, and Macao-China—but above seven others.
  37. A simple linear regression between test scores and salaries generates a slight negative and statistically insignificant coefficient. If the two outliers, Mexico and Korea, are omitted, the relationship is slightly positive but not statistically significant.
  38. Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study: TIMMS 2003. Accessed from http://nces. ed.gov.timss/TIMSS)#Tables.asp?figure=6&Quest.
  39. For an example of the complexities involved in explaining achievement differences across countries, see Thomas Fuchs and Ludger Woessman, “What Accounts for International Differences in Student Performance? A Re-examination Using PISA Data,” Working Paper 1235 (Munich: CESifo, July 2004).
  40. OECD, Teachers Matter (see note 1), table 4.1, p. 105.
  41. Ibid., p. 105.
  42. Gabor Halasz and others, Attracting, Developing and Retaining Effective Teachers. Country Note: Germany (Paris: OECD, September 2004), para. 47, p. 14.
  43. Ibid., para 63, p. 19; and OECD, Teachers Matter (see note 1), p. 107.
  44. OECD, Teachers Matter (see note 1), p. 108.
  45. Ibid., p. 110.
  46. Ibid., p. 109.
  47. Ibid., p. 114.
  48. Ibid., table 4.1 and discussion on p. 115.
  49. Ibid., p. 84
  50. S. Veenmann, “Perceived Problems of Beginning Teachers,” Review of Educational Research 54 (1984): 143–78; and E. Britton, L. Paine, and S. Raizen, “Middle Grades Mathematics and Science Teacher Induction in Selected Countries: Preliminary Findings, National Center for Improving Science Education” (Washington: WestEd, 1999), cited in OECD, Teachers Matter (see note 1), p. 117.
  51. OECD, Teachers Matter (see note 1), p. 21.
  52. National Council on Teacher Quality, Attracting, Developing and Retaining Effective Teachers: Background Report for the United States (U.S. Department of Education, International Affairs Office, 2004), p. 37.
  53. Scottish Executive Education Department, Scottish Teacher Induction Scheme (2005), www.scotland.gov.uk/publications.